Mark Javitch is a lawyer and an author, and he wrote a book called Zapruder Frame-Up: Lies told about the Zapruder film to frame Oswald. The second subtitle is: How the Sixth Floor Museum and the National Archives continue the coverup.
https://www.amazon.com/Zapruder-Frame-Up-National-Archives-Continue-ebook/dp/B0HNZ9ZZJJ
I communicated directly with the Chief Archivist of the United States, Dr. Colleen Shogan. She no longer has that position, but she did until August 7 of this year. I could tell you what we discussed, but that would be a tangent.
Mark cites frames from the Zapruder film that he thinks were altered. I'm not opposed to doing that, but I think the most important thing is to have a global perspective about what was done to the Zapruder film.
But first, I want to say that the Zapruder film does not frame Oswald. Oswald said that he was standing out in front with Bill Shelley during the motorcade and that he did not own a rifle. That being the case, how could anything in the Zapruder film frame him? Oswald's lawyer at trial wouldn't even bring up the Zapruder film. Why should he? He would just say that his client was standing outside and that he didn't own a rifle, and therefore nothing in the Zapruder film could have any bearing on him, Oswald.
So, I want to give Mark my perspective on the Zapruder film. The first thing to realize is that we have something that is very valuable. It is Dan Rather's description of the Zapruder film given on November 25, 1963. Even though I'm sure he was prepped by his handlers, the fact is that the "story" of the Zapruder film, and the "story" of the assassination hadn't been written yet. The Single Bullet Theory wasn't introduced until April 1964. So, everything was very raw at that point. BUT STILL, HE HAD HIS EYES ON THE ORIGINAL FILM. So, we should pay close attention to him.
So, what did Dan Rather say that the Zapruder film showed?
He said that just when the President put his hand up to the side of his head, that he suddenly lurched forward. '"The first shot had hit him." He said Mrs. Kennedy was looking another direction.
Does that describe what we see in the Zapruder film today? No, it does not. And Rather didn't say that the President sprung his arms up with his elbows out and brought his hands to his throat.
Anyone who watched the Zapruder film that we have today would describe it in terms of the freeway sign. They would say that after the President disappeared behind the freeway sign briefly, he emerged from it like he was struggling, like something was wrong with his throat. He yanked on his tie with his left hand, and he put his right hand over his mouth, and it looks like he tried to cough to clear a respiratory obstruction.
But, Rather didn't say anything about that. He just said that the President lurched because he had been hit with the first shot. And he mimicked the lurching. But, after that, he went on to Connally, saying that Connally had spun around, clockwise, facing the President, and then he, Connally, was shot in the front.
What's weird about this is that this was Monday November 25, and Connally's wounds were well known at that point. He was shot in his right posterior back, close to his armpit, and the bullet exited below his right nipple.
Rather described the third shot as one that hit the President in the head and caused his head to move violently forward. Rather said nothing about the back and to the left motion that we see today in the Zapruder film and that Kevin Costner made famous in Oliver Stone's JFK.
No one can make sense of the discrepancies between what Rather said and what we see in the film. Rather is still alive, and he has never explained the discrepancies. But, I'll tell you what I think it means.
They did know, at that point, that they were limited to three bullets for Oswald, and this story that they had Rather tell, accounted for the three bullets. Later, when it was found out that James Tague was grazed, they realized that they had to save a bullet for him, and that's why they came up with the Single Bullet Theory.
But, on November 25, they still thought they had 3 bullets play with. And that's how they played with them, attributing one bullet that hit JFK in the back, not claiming that it exited his throat. And then they spent one bullet on Connally. And the third bullet they assigned to the head shot, but they had him describe it as a shot from the rear that caused him to lurch forward.
I don't think Rather ever said the name Oswald, but the story he told was based on the idea that Oswald was on the 6th floor and that he fired 3 shots.
It looks like Rather had frames in front of him that he was describing. So, here's what probably happened:
The first shot was the shot that hit JFK in the back high on the hill. It's interesting that Rather said that JFK was shot, but he didn't describe the consequences of it. He moved on to Connally right away. So, why didn't Rather have more to say about the first shot?
It's because the first shot didn't do much physical damage to Kennedy. It was just an ice dart that penetrated very shallow. The harm was from the chemicals that were in it, the nerve agent, and perhaps other drugs. But, Rather didn't describe them because he was told not to. I think they must have had a frame in front of him that showed JFK right when he was shot in the back. But, they didn't want him to say any more about it.
So, what frame am I refferring to? None that we have. By the time they made the film public, the story was that JFK was shot with one bullet that entered his back and exited his throat. Of course, they couldn't show us that since it didn't happen. So, they put the phony freeway sign in the Zapruder film and said that it happened behind the sign.
What the original Zapruder film must have shown was JFK being shot in the back high on the hill, and after that, he started getting weird. He stopped smiling and waving. Jackie became aware that something was wrong; so she started focusing on him and stopping all smiling and waving. The limo was being slowed and just when it got to Umbrella Man, it stopped, and he delivered the dart that entered JFK's throat, using the umbrella gun that Charles Senseney invented for the CIA.
After that, JFK, who was no longer in his right mind, panicked. Either the dart itself or a bolus of blood caused an obstruction in his airway. So, he raised his hands in a panic to deal with it. He pulled on his tie with his left hand, and he put his right hand over his mouth and coughed to clear the obstruction. And it worked. He could breathe all right after that.
But, his mind was gone at that point. He couldn't speak, and it wasn't because of what happened to his throat. It was because of what happened to his mind. And he just sat there and did nothing. He did nothing to protect himself or his wife. It seems that he was incapable of understanding what was going on.
Remember that the Zapruder film had no sound. So, we don't have the advantage of hearing gunshots. As for what Rather said about Connally, I suspect that it looked to him like Connally was shot in the chest right before he fell back on his wife.
But now, I'll give you the bottom line. What the original Zapruder film showed was JFK being shot in the back high on the hill. It was a shot that did very little physical damage to him. But, it had bizarre effects right away; he stopped smiling and waving. And very quickly his wife realized that something was wrong with him. According to shills Gerald Posner and Dale Myers, the "Single Bullet" struck Kennedy at 224. Oh really? Then why did Jackie become turned and focused on her husband in the 180s? And why did she never turn away from him again and resume politicking if he wasn't hit until 224?
The real Zapruder film must have shown Kennedy being hit the first time in the back with the poison ice dart. Then, it showed him riding down the steepest part of the hill reacting to that and getting sicker by the second? Then it showed him getting shot by Umbrella Man, but it may have looked very subtle. It was designed to look subtle. And they covered it up completely with the phony freeway sign.
The biggest alteration that was done to the Zapruder film was cutting out JFK's trek from when he was shot in the back until when he was shot in the throat. They had to make it go away. And they did it be removing as many frames as they could. But, they had to leave some in of him reacting to the poisonous back shot, so they smudged his face out, so that we can't see that he was in turmoil.
And then, it showed the fatal head shot with the back and to the left motion of the head. So, why did Rather say that the final shot showed his head going violently forward? They were lying about it, and maybe they had a prop that Rather was looking at it that looked like what he described.
I think they made a big mistake on November 25 having Rather do that. It's not like they had to. And they should have realized that the story might get changed, which it did. It changed drastically.
You should watch this repeatedly because it is evidence that the Zapruder film was drastically and draconianlly altered. And I mean way beyond stripes and splices. It was altered to a Frankensteinian extent.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.